Is "Beaming" Simulated?
Hey guys, just wondering if Beaming a missile is simulated?
I.E Putting the incoming missile on the aircraft 3-9 line to force the missile to expend more energy.
Oh yeah seen as this is my first post, let me just say fantastic job on this game. Loving every minute and i have to say from the community and dev responses on these forums, there appears to be a huge scope for improvement and additions.
I cant wait for the mission editor and look forward to at some point hopefully the posibiilty of coop, cant think of a better sunday afternoon (well maybe a cup final win) than sitting and being able to disscuss tactics and deploy coordinated strike packages...
Turbo Tape Games Dev
Thank you for the kind words. We are very happy with how this forum is working out. Lots of friendly, smart and fun game fans here, as it should be.
We don't specifically simulate beaming a missile, but I wonder if this is what the outcome is from how it works otherwise.
Thanks for the response JanH.
I've been playing around micro managing the BVR engagments, trying to beam and drop alt then climb hoping that it would force the missile to manouver. I suppose as long as the missile flight trajectory and energy expenditure are simulated throughout the missiles flight (more critically in the final glide phase) then there is no reason why it shouldnt work.
Beaming is a sensor countermeasure; against a doppler radar, turning to 91/269 off of the sensor means that it will approach you at the same rate it approaches the ground beneath you, meaning the return signal from you will be shifted exactly the same as the ground. That makes some radars, considered long obsolete today, ignore you; more modern radars lose one possible way of separating you from ground clutter.
Missile simulation in NWAC is very limited right now. All missiles act like terminal phase direct homing missiles, and it doesn't seem like aircraft/missile kinetic energy is considered at all right now. Just look at the way missiles (and planes too) "stop" while they change their altitude. Very easily seen when you change the altitude of one plane of a formation.
Most real missiles will lead their targets - at least until the terminal homing* phase, and even in that phase. This simply leads to better missile kinetics. Beaming is completely useless for kinetic purposes against these missiles.
If I remember it right, there's one particular exception in the (fim-92) stinger (best known for its shoulder-launched variant) in that it doesn't lead until just before it detonates - when the bearing rate goes up (because the distance is small compared to the speeds.) The idea is to move into the plane's body (from seeking the engines at the back) before detonation. At least I think it was the stinger.
* All missiles are also in terminal homing mode through their flight. Did you know the (real) amraam doesn't turn on its radar and announce its presence before it's just a few km out? (Unless fired in "bore" mode on a bearing at which point it will go active immediately. Then there's the "go to point X, activate your radar, and start homing on whatever" mode. Before that it's command guided, or autonomously navigating if it doesn't receive target updates.
Given direct seekers, if it's a better idea to beam or to tail is a question for mathematicians. I suspect beaming will only be better if the turn has the appropriate kinetic penalty; I don't think NWAC today does that. (My missiles tend to do a 180 and start tailchasing enemy missiles. QED.)